The real question here is why is it a waste to draft a QB in later rounds but it is completely acceptable for other positions?

Isn't this about mid-rounds though? I mean, if you can get a decent slot corner/receiver/situational rusher in the mid-rounds who can play meaningful minutes from the get-go, is that not more preferable?

The real question here is why is it a waste to draft a QB in later rounds but it is completely acceptable for other positions?

Isn't this about mid-rounds though? I mean, if you can get a decent slot corner/receiver/situational rusher in the mid-rounds who can play meaningful minutes from the get-go, is that not more preferable?

Doesnt that depend utterly and completely on what the team needs and what is available on the boards?

Not to mention, of course getting quality minutes out of a nickle would be preferable to "wasting" a pick on a QB in the 5th. But the point he was making is what about the nickle QB that does squat and is released before the season even starts? Why is it okay to "waste" a pick on him?_________________
CK on the sig

Another thing to consider, are the QBs drafted in rounds 5 or 6 really any better than the ones that go undrafted? I think the difference is very minimal to be honest. Id probably value other non-QB depth positions with my mid to late round picks than a QB. Basically if you have an elite starter, your backup probably wont matter much therefore you dont spend an early to mid rd pick on them you either get a veteran QB or a late round pick/undrafted free agent. If you are a team with a young starting QB, you're probably going to have a veteran backup QB. If you are a team with an aging starter or a poor starter, youre probably smart to use spend a high pick on a QB.

I would say, on average, 3rd, 4th and 5th round QBs are better than undrafted ones.

Well of course, 3rd, 4th and 5th rd picks are pretty much guaranteed a roster spot based on status and undrafted QBs have to earn it. But I still question the value in a 3rd, 4th or 5th rd QB. If you need depth, i think using a 6th or 7th rd pick would be more ideal saving a mid round pick for another need. If you need a starter, youre likely not going to get one in rd 3, 4 ,5.

I would say, on average, 3rd, 4th and 5th round QBs are better than undrafted ones.

Well of course, 3rd, 4th and 5th rd picks are pretty much guaranteed a roster spot based on status and undrafted QBs have to earn it. But I still question the value in a 3rd, 4th or 5th rd QB. If you need depth, i think using a 6th or 7th rd pick would be more ideal saving a mid round pick for another need. If you need a starter, youre likely not going to get one in rd 3, 4 ,5.

Or you could do the smart thing and draft based on value._________________

KingBishop wrote:

JammerHammer21 wrote:

Jarvis looked like a slug on and off the field.

Off the field? Like when he is grocery shopping, does he block the freezer aisle with his sluggish selection of which hungry man to buy?

I would say, on average, 3rd, 4th and 5th round QBs are better than undrafted ones.

Well of course, 3rd, 4th and 5th rd picks are pretty much guaranteed a roster spot based on status and undrafted QBs have to earn it. But I still question the value in a 3rd, 4th or 5th rd QB. If you need depth, i think using a 6th or 7th rd pick would be more ideal saving a mid round pick for another need. If you need a starter, youre likely not going to get one in rd 3, 4 ,5.

But nobody is looking for a starter in the 3rd, 4th or 5th at most positions. Theyre generally looking for depth and projects.

And I am not talking about roster spots. I am talking about quality. A 3rd, 4th or 5th rd QB is generally going to provide you with better depth at every position than an undrafted player._________________
CK on the sig

I would say, on average, 3rd, 4th and 5th round QBs are better than undrafted ones.

Well of course, 3rd, 4th and 5th rd picks are pretty much guaranteed a roster spot based on status and undrafted QBs have to earn it. But I still question the value in a 3rd, 4th or 5th rd QB. If you need depth, i think using a 6th or 7th rd pick would be more ideal saving a mid round pick for another need. If you need a starter, youre likely not going to get one in rd 3, 4 ,5.

Or you could do the smart thing and draft based on value.

Which is what I was getting at earlier when I said it all depends on the situation. Who is on the board. What your needs are. If there is a promising QB in the 3rd, 4th or 5th, and you are looking to build some depth or see what he has, you take him. You dont wait to see what scraps are left when the draft is over._________________
CK on the sig

PuggerJoined: 01 May 2010Posts: 10797Location: Titletown for the summer!

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:29 am Post subject:

J Pep 4 Step wrote:

vikingsrule wrote:

J Pep 4 Step wrote:

I would say, on average, 3rd, 4th and 5th round QBs are better than undrafted ones.

Well of course, 3rd, 4th and 5th rd picks are pretty much guaranteed a roster spot based on status and undrafted QBs have to earn it. But I still question the value in a 3rd, 4th or 5th rd QB. If you need depth, i think using a 6th or 7th rd pick would be more ideal saving a mid round pick for another need. If you need a starter, youre likely not going to get one in rd 3, 4 ,5.

But nobody is looking for a starter in the 3rd, 4th or 5th at most positions. Theyre generally looking for depth and projects.

And I am not talking about roster spots. I am talking about quality. A 3rd, 4th or 5th rd QB is generally going to provide you with better depth at every position than an undrafted player.

And don't you draft a 3rd or later rd player at another position for depth too? And if this player is a diamond in the rough you can really hit the jackpot._________________

I would say, on average, 3rd, 4th and 5th round QBs are better than undrafted ones.

Well of course, 3rd, 4th and 5th rd picks are pretty much guaranteed a roster spot based on status and undrafted QBs have to earn it. But I still question the value in a 3rd, 4th or 5th rd QB. If you need depth, i think using a 6th or 7th rd pick would be more ideal saving a mid round pick for another need. If you need a starter, youre likely not going to get one in rd 3, 4 ,5.

Or you could do the smart thing and draft based on value.

Which is what I was getting at earlier when I said it all depends on the situation. Who is on the board. What your needs are. If there is a promising QB in the 3rd, 4th or 5th, and you are looking to build some depth or see what he has, you take him. You dont wait to see what scraps are left when the draft is over.

Exactly. If Kirk Cousins had lasted to the 5th, I would have been totally cool if the Rams took him._________________

KingBishop wrote:

JammerHammer21 wrote:

Jarvis looked like a slug on and off the field.

Off the field? Like when he is grocery shopping, does he block the freezer aisle with his sluggish selection of which hungry man to buy?

I would say, on average, 3rd, 4th and 5th round QBs are better than undrafted ones.

Well of course, 3rd, 4th and 5th rd picks are pretty much guaranteed a roster spot based on status and undrafted QBs have to earn it. But I still question the value in a 3rd, 4th or 5th rd QB. If you need depth, i think using a 6th or 7th rd pick would be more ideal saving a mid round pick for another need. If you need a starter, youre likely not going to get one in rd 3, 4 ,5.

But nobody is looking for a starter in the 3rd, 4th or 5th at most positions. Theyre generally looking for depth and projects.

And I am not talking about roster spots. I am talking about quality. A 3rd, 4th or 5th rd QB is generally going to provide you with better depth at every position than an undrafted player.

And don't you draft a 3rd or later rd player at another position for depth too? And if this player is a diamond in the rough you can really hit the jackpot.